International Journal for Asian Contemporary Research, 2(2): 34-42

Research Article

Growth and Physiological Responses of Maize to Deficit Irrigation

Abdur Razzak,
Abdur Razzak,

Farming Systems Engineering Laboratory, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, Rajshahi University, Bangladesh.

Rejvi Ahmed Bhuiya,
Rejvi Ahmed Bhuiya,

Department of Crop Science and Technology, Rajshahi University, Bangladesh

Prabesh Rai,
Prabesh Rai,

Farming Systems Engineering Laboratory, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, Rajshahi University, Bangladesh.

Tariful Alam Khan,
Tariful Alam Khan,

Farming Systems Engineering Laboratory, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, Rajshahi University, Bangladesh.

Nilufar Yasmin, A M Shahidul Alam
Nilufar Yasmin, A M Shahidul Alam

Farming Systems Engineering Laboratory, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, Rajshahi University, Bangladesh.

and M Robiul Islam*
M Robiul Islam*

Farming Systems Engineering Laboratory, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, Rajshahi University, Bangladesh. Email: [email protected]

Received: 13 June, 2022 || Accepted: 20 July, 2022 || Published: 28 July, 2022



A field experiment was conducted at the Agronomy Field Laboratory, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, University of Rajshahi, from 2 December 2020 to 20 April 2021 to find out the effect of deficit irrigation schedule for maize measured based on panevaporation. The field experiment was set up using a split-plot experimental design including two maize varieties (Syngenta NH-7720 & Ishpahani Diamond) and four irrigation regimes viz. T1 (irrigation based on125% of pan evaporation), T2 (irrigation based on 100% of pan evaporation), T3 (irrigation based on 75% of pan evaporation) and T4 (irrigation based on 50% of pan evaporation). Considering different phyto-physiological responses and yield of maize, it was found that different irrigation regimes differed significantly. In most cases, the highest performance was noted for maximum irrigation treatment (T1), which reduced gradually with the reduction of irrigation amount. The highest grain yield (13.82 t ha-1) was observed in the treatment T1, which was statistically identical to the T2 (12.02 t ha-1). However, grain yield reduced significantly by 25.50% and 32.05% for T3 and T4, respectively, but water use efficiency (WUE) was higher in T4 (2.64 kg ha-1 cm-1) and the lower (2.43 kg ha-1 cm-1) in T3. Although the maize varieties differ significantly, overall performance was good in V2 (Ishpahani Diamond). The highest grain yield (13.897 t ha-1) was obtained from the combination of V2T1, which was more or less similar to the combination of V1T2. Based on my result, it seemed that an irrigation amount equivalent to 100% of pan evaporation could produce nearly the same amount of maize yield with 25 % less irrigational water compared with T1. So, it is suggested that an amount of irrigation equal to 100% of pan evaporation would be the best way to grow maize. This would give a good grain yield and allow less water to be used for irrigation, which is very helpful in the north-western parts of Bangladesh that are affected by drought.


Keywords:  Panevaporation, Irrigation schedule and phytophysiological response.

Copyright information: Copyright © 2022 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

    To cite this article: Razzak, A., Bhuiya, R. A., Rai, P., Khan, T. A., Yasmin, N., Alam, A. M.S. and Islam, M. R., (2022). Growth and Physiological Responses of Maize to Deficit Irrigation. International Journal for Asian Contemporary Research, 2 (2): 34-42.  


  1. Ahmad, I., Wajid, S. A., Ahmad, A., Cheema, M. J. M., & Judge, J. (2019). Optimizing irrigation and nitrogen requirements for maize through empirical modeling in semi-arid environment. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(2), 1227-1237.
  2. Ali, M. H., Hoque, M. R., Hassan, A. A., & Khair, A. (2007). Effects of deficit irrigation on yield, water productivity, and economic returns of wheat. Agricultural water management, 92(3), 151-161.
  3. Ali, M. Y., Waddington, S. R., Timsina, J., Hodson, D. P., & Dixon, J. (2009). Maize-rice cropping systems in Bangladesh: status and research needs.
  4. Bala, B. K., Haque, M. A., Hossain, M. A., & Majumdar, S. (2010). Post harvest loss and technical efficiency of rice, wheat and maize production system: assessment and measures for strengthening food security. Final Report CF, 6(08).
  5. BARI (Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute). (2015). Annual Report for the Year 2014-15. Joydebpur, Gazipur. p. 127-129.
  6. Chen, C., Wang, E and Yu, Q. 2009. Modeling the effects of climate variability and water management on crop water productivity and water balance in the North China Plain. Agricultural Water Management. 97 (8): 1175-1184.
  7. Chowdhury,  M.K.  and  Islam,  M.A.  (1993). Production  and  uses  of  maize  (in  Bengali). Published  by  Farm  Research  Division,  Bangladesh  Agricultural  Research  Institute, Gazipur, Bangladesh.
  8. Evans, R. G., & Sadler, E. J. (2008). Methods and technologies to improve efficiency of water use. Water resources research, 44(7).
  9. Gulati  A and  Dixon  J  (2008). Maize  in  Asia:  Changing Markets  and  Incentives, Academic  Foundation,  New Delhi.
  10. Hunt, R. (1979). Plant growth analysis: the rationale behind the use of the fitted mathematical function. Annals of Botany, 43(2), 245-249.
  11. Hussain, N. (2011). Screening of maize varieties for grain yield at Dera Ismail Khan. J. Anim. Plant Sci, 21(3), 626-628.
  12. Hussaini, M. A., Ogunlela, V. B., Ramalan, A. A., & Falaki, A. M. (2001). Growth and development of maize (Zea mays L.) in response to different levels of nitrogen, phosphorus and irrigation. CROP RESEARCH-HISAR-, 22(2), 141-149.
  13. Jia, Xucun & Shao, Lijie & Liu, P. & Zhao, Bingqiang & Gu, Limin & Dong, Shuting & So, Hwat-Bing & Zhang, Jiwang & Zhao, Bin. (2014). Effect of different nitrogen and irrigation treatments on yield and nitrate leaching of summer maize (Zea mays L.) under lysimeter conditions. Agricultural Water Management. 137. 92–103. 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.02.010.
  14. Jones, Hamlyn G. "Irrigation scheduling: advantages and pitfalls of plant-based methods." Journal of experimental botany 55.407 (2004): 2427-2436.
  15. Kang, S., Shi, W., & Zhang, J. (2000). An improved water-use efficiency for maize grown under regulated deficit irrigation. Field crops research, 67(3), 207-214.
  16. Kirda, C.. (2002). Deficit irrigation scheduling based on plant growth stages showing water stress tolerance. Deficit Irrigation Practices. 22. 3-10.
  17. Manal, M.E.T., Samiha, A. O. and Fouad, A. K. (2007). Irrigation scheduling for maize grown under Middle Egypt conditions. Res. J. of Agril. and Bio. Sci.3(5): 456-462.
  18. Mishra, H. S., Rathore, T. R., & Pant, R. C. (1990). Effect of intermittent irrigation on groundwater table contribution, irrigation requirement and yield of rice in Mollisols of the Tarai region. Agricultural Water Management, 18(3), 231-241.
  19. Mugabe, F. T., & Nyakatawa, E. Z. (2000). effect of deficit irrigation on wheat and opportunities of growing wheat on residual soil moisture in southeast Zimbabwe. Agricultural Water Management, 46(2), 111-119.
  20. Mungai, N. W., Motavalli, P. P., Nelson, K. A., & Kremer, R. J. (2005). Differences in yields, residue composition
  21. Parthasarathi, T., Vanitha, K., & Velu, G. (2013). Impact of irrigation water stress and plant population on water productivity and maize yield. Madras Agricultural Journal, 100(1-3), 95-97.
  22. Patil, S. A., Mahadkar, U. V., Mohite, N. C., & Karpe, A. H. (2012). Effect of irrigation and fertigation levels on yield, quality and nutrient uptake of rabi sweet corn (Zea mays sacchrata). Journal of Soils and Crops, 22(1), 100-104.
  23. Payero, J. O., Tarkalson, D. D., Irmak, S., Davison, D., & Petersen, J. L. (2009). Effect of timing of a deficit-irrigation allocation on corn evapotranspiration, yield, water use efficiency and dry mass. Agricultural water management, 96(10), 1387-1397.
  24. Sahoo RK, Bhardwaj D and Tuteia J (2013). Biofertilizers: a sustainable eco-friendly agricultural approach to crop improvement. Plant Acc. Envi. Stress. 403-432. DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-5001-6 -15
  25. Salemi, Hamidreza & Soom, Mohd & Lee, Teang & Yusoff, M.K. & Ahmad, D.. (2011). Effects of deficit irrigation on water productivity and maize yields in arid regions of Iran. Pertanika Journal of Tropical Agricultural Science. 34. 207-216.
  26. Shaheenuzzamn, M., Saha, R. R., Ahmed, B., Rahman, J., & Salim, M. (2015). Green cob and fodder yield of sweet corn as influenced by sowing time in the hilly region. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research, 40(1), 61-69.
  27. Shivakumar, H.. (2011). Effect of phenophase based irrigation schedules on growth, yield and quality of baby corn (Zea mays L.). Agricultural Sciences. 02. 267-272. 10.4236/as.2011.23035.
  28. Tariq, J., & Usman, K. (2009). Regulated deficit irrigation scheduling of maize crop. 2009. Sarhad J. Agric, 25(3), 441-450.
  29. Tekwa, I. J., & Bwade, E. K. (2011). Estimation of irrigation water requirement of maize (zea-mays) using pan evaporation method in Maiduguri, Northeastern Nigeria. Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR Journal. Manuscript, (1552).
  30. Viswanatha, G. B., Ramachandrappa, B. K., & Nanjappa, H. V. (2002). Soil–plant water status and yield of sweet corn (Zea mays L. cv. Saccharata) as influenced by drip irrigation and planting methods. Agricultural Water Management, 55(2), 85-91.
  31. Wang, X., & Xing, Y. (2017). Effects of irrigation and nitrogen on maize growth and yield components. In Global changes and natural disaster management: geo-information technologies (pp. 63-74). Springer, Cham.
  32. Zhang, H., & Oweis, T. (1999). Water–yield relations and optimal irrigation scheduling of wheat in the Mediterranean region. Agricultural water management, 38(3), 195-211.
  33. Zhang, Y., Kendy, E., Qiang, Y., Changming, L., Yanjun, S., & Hongyong, S. (2004). Effect of soil water deficit on evapotranspiration, crop yield, and water use efficiency in the North China Plain. Agricultural Water Management, 64(2), 107-122.

  Article View: 153 times